Impossible To Pin Down

      Atwood tells us that there are stereotypical characterizations of men and women, gender typing you accepted, and typical literary convention writers rely on. Atwood seems to think a writer is the guardian of the moral and ethical sense of the society. Gender role differences are not issued in section A showing a typical ending of story and a middle-class life. On the other hand, section B and C are strongly describing two types of gender role differences. Let’s see the characters acting their gender roles successfully and giving a writer chance to be the guardian. Let’s consider also whether Atwood is the guardian or not.

       In section B, John and Mary, the primary male protagonist and female protagonist reflect the old gender role descriptions: “Man is strong, rational, and sexually active. Woman is weak, emotional and irrational, compensatorily, sexually passive or uninterested, dependent on and subject to a male commander, and wants to get married.“ Moreover, John is described as a injurer, and Mary is victimized. They are one obvious example of male and female character who have been pigeonholed and stereotyped for centuries.

       Another John in section C is surely a middle-class patriarch. He can afford to worry about his hair falling out, and even to suicide. He is another typical male character, who is not mature mentally, and doesn’t have ability to control his mind rationally. He represents a mentally weak patriarch wandering outside of home.

       The biggest difference between section B and section C is power structure. Power structure is reversed in section C true to the subject who loves or is loved. So, it leads readers to regard them as a just-before-tomboy and just-before-sissy, and to sympathize with John. However, the male character’s old remain is described in James. James appears in version C as Mary’s lover. Only twenty-two years old, James is not ready to settle down. He spends a lot of time riding around on his motorcycle, ‘‘being free.’’ Mary is also another typical female character being attracted by James. Unlike Mary in B, John in C resists to be victimized to the end by killing himself and the two of them as well. Therefore, though Mary in section C escapes from an enervated and passive character, section C inherits an interminable array of roles.

       Atwood keeps on doing this job in section D and E. Fred is Madge’s second husband. In version D, he represents an ideal man that a woman in grief can rely on and survives a tidal wave, but in another version E, he dies. The person who has a bad heart could be Madge. But, Atwood chooses Fred, because the survivor should be a woman to show that the one who devotes oneself to charity work is a woman.

       In this proper and intended method, Atwood criticizes the other writers and their clichés. Is she a revolutionary or feminist? I do not think so. If Atwood wanted to escape from the writer groups that she criticizes, she should have been equal to express sex of the persons who does not love their partner. She expresses John’s sex in section B as “fucks”. On the contrary, she expresses woman’s sex as “sleeps with” in any case—section B and section C. Then, is she the guardian, too? I do not know well. She knows too much and is too sensitive to be categorized as the guardian. Atwood in this story throws out some curious and challenging things to readers and to writers. She just throws out, resisting being categorized. She sees through a brick wall in this story, so, to me facing her work first, it is impossible to pin her down on one wall.

       If she asks for a substitute for “sleeps with,” I am able to answer only “I am not a writer and that is not my job.” Anyway, I am an irresponsible grad student familiar with criticizing other’s works, who is familiar with pretending to have some capabilities, and actually knows well she will not rush to refute my statements. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: I do my assignment. I do my assignment. I do my assignment.

in 2004